Customer Reviews

Buck Wild: How Republicans Broke the Bank and Became the Party of Big Government

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

I am glad I bought this book. Good books entertain and inform. Really good books also make you think. Buck Wild is a really good book.

The author tells a compelling story about the federal budget process. Like any good story, it has villians and heroes. Who wears the black hats and who wears the white ones will surprise you.

The history of the budget process, how it's written, approved and implemented is well researched by the author and presented in an entertaining and informative style. For a non-fiction offering, Buck Wild is more paced than most books of this genre. It's a page turner that keeps you wondering what the next chapter will offer up.

Today's hot items of term limits, the war on terror,taxes and the deficit are all discussed in the book. How the current Republican leadership has chosen to govern in light of these factors is the book's real meat. Once the GOP gained control of both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue they changed. Mr. Slivinski offers some intriguing reasons.

The author closes with a brilliant historical analysis of the spending habits of two types of government, united government, our current form, and divided (gridlock).

I have been a proud Republican for thirty years and will continue to be.However when I enter the voting booth this November I will be approaching the who and why of my vote from a different viewpoint thanks to Mr. Slivinski.

Buck Wild is a must read,if you pride yourself in being an informed voter.

by Larry Mann
Trenton NJ

The inability -- or the unwillingness -- of congressional Republicans to limit the growth of government has been a source of considerable frustration for fiscal conservatives. Shortly after the 1994 election, many conservatives hoped that Republicans would fulfill their campaign promises to end scores of federal programs and eliminate Cabinet agencies. However, just a few years later the Republican National Committee was sending out press releases boasting about record increases in federal education spending. Even worse, in 2004 the same Republican leadership ruthlessly twisted arms and violated House procedural rules to pass the Medicare prescription-drug bill, the largest increase in entitlement spending since the Great Society.

Stephen Slivinski's new book, Buck Wild: How the Republicans Broke the Bank and Became the Party of Big Government, describes this transformation. The book begins with President Reagan's bruising battle to pass the 1981 budget, which included substantial cuts in both taxes and spending. This was one of the most important victories of the Reagan presidency, as Reagan was never again able to enact substantial cuts in expenditures. Still, Reagan was at least fairly successful in limiting the growth of government. In fact, non-defense discretionary spending actually declined relative to inflation during the 1980s.

Unfortunately, Reagan's legacy has been lost on his successors. President Bush's tax hike in 1990 betrayed many fiscal conservatives. Furthermore, after Republicans won control of both the House and Senate in 1994, they seemed poised actually to reduce the size of government. In fact, in 1995 Congress passed a budget that cut non-defense domestic spending for the first time since 1981. However, after a conflict with President Clinton over Medicare, Republican congressional leadership lost all interest in reducing spending. Sadly, this trend has continued well into the presidency of George W. Bush. Overall, during the Bush administration, spending has grown faster than at any time since the presidency of Lyndon Johnson. Even worse, many agencies which have received large budgetary increases are not even remotely related to the war on terror.

This inability of Republicans to limit spending causes Slivinski to argue for divided government. Slivinski provides statistical evidence that federal spending actually grows more slowly during times of divided government. Furthermore, he argues that two of the most important political victories for fiscal conservatives, the 1981 budget and the 1986 Tax Reform Act, were passed during times of divided government. In fairness, both of these bills were passed partly because Democrats suffered stinging electoral defeats in both the 1980 and 1984 presidential elections. Regardless, Slivinski convincingly argues that Republicans have done little to promote fiscal discipline despite controlling both the Congress and the presidency for the past five years.

Now despite the pessimistic nature of the book, there are actually some silver linings. First, many of the Republican House members who led the charge for limited government after the 1994 election have not suffered politically. To the contrary, many of them are doing very well. Sam Brownback and Tom Coburn have been elected to the U.S. Senate from Kansas and Oklahoma, respectively. Furthermore, Congressman John Shadegg of Arizona was a candidate for House Majority Leader and now serves as the chair of the Republican Study Committee. In fact, these men are enjoying better political fortunes than their onetime adversaries in the House leadership, including Newt Gingrich, Dick Armey, and Tom Delay, all of whom are no longer serving in elected office.

Perhaps even more importantly, Slivinski provides numerous examples of how a relatively small number of Republican House members have been able to exert enough political pressure on their colleagues to enact some reductions in spending, in part thanks to the slim Republican congressional majorities. For instance, the defection of about a dozen conservative members on a procedural vote in 1995 gave them some leverage to push for larger cuts in funding for the National Endowment for the Arts. Furthermore, the willingness of the Republican Study Committee to publicly criticize the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere" in Alaska resulted in some additional reductions in spending. Perhaps the presence of additional fiscal conservatives in the House could restore the Republican Party's legacy as the party of limited government.

Overall, Slivinski does a fine job providing an overview of the leftward shift in fiscal policy preferences among the leadership of the Republican Party. More time could have been devoted to the congressional effort to reform Medicare in 1995, which marked the last time Republican House leadership made a real effort to cut spending. Furthermore, more attention could have also been paid to the inability of Gramm Rudman Hollings Act, PAYGO rules, and other institutional mechanisms to control the growth of government. All in all, however, these are relatively minor complaints. By concisely detailing how the leadership of the Republican Party has abandoned limited government and showing the need for fiscal conservatives to look elsewhere for possible political strategies, Slivinski has performed a fine service for his readers.

-Review Appeared in National Review Online on August 16, 2006

Steven Slivinski's BUCK WILD does an excellent job of documenting the migration of the Republicans from a party of limited government conservatism (Goldwater/Reagan) to a party of national greatness conservatism (Brooks/Kristol), compassionate conservatism (Brooks) and big government conservatism (Barnes).

Starting his analysis in 1994 with the Republican Revolution, Slivinksi argues that the Republican Party stuck to its Contract With America pledge to scale back a federal government "that is too big, too intrusive and too easy with the public's money," but only for a short period. From 1995 through 1997, the Party was able to limit discretionary spending, move towards a balanced budget and pass welfare and farm subsidy reform under intense opposition. Beginning in approximately 1998 when a strong economy produced a surge in federal revenues, the Party started to abandon its limited government roots in favor of expanded spending, targeted tax breaks and increased government pork. This transformation reached its apex under the GWB administration, which has presided over the largest expansion in federal spending since LBJ (in total) and Nixon (after excluding defense and homeland security expenditures). This leads Slivinksi to conclude that the Republicans have become the party of big government.

Many who disagree with Slivinski's and others' criticisms of the Republican spending spree, like to argue that federal spending increases should be evaluated as a percentage of GDP, rather than in absolute terms. While I disagree, the record from 1995 through 2006 lends little support for this argument. In 1995, when the Republicans took control of Congress, federal spending was 20.7% of GDP. By the time Clinton left office in 2001, Congress and Clinton had shrunk federal spending to 18.4% of GDP and if left to increase on auto-pilot, federal spending would total approximately 17% of GDP today-- a dramatic decrease indeed. Instead by 2006, GWB and the Republican Congress had expanded the federal government to 20.8% of GDP, effectively reversing the gains of the previous decade.

What started out so fruitfully in 1994 with the Republican Revolution has ended with a bloated federal government and a Republican Party with little direction. BUCK WILD explores all of these areas and more. There are also plenty of behind-the-scenes accounts (e.g. Gingrich vs. the Gang of Eleven) that make the book both informative and entertaining.

While this book is an excellent contribution to the increasingly heated public discussion over what GOP rule in Washington has meant for the country's fiscal affairs, I believe that non-policy wonks stand to benefit the most from reading this book. In other words, if you're one of the 99.9% of Americans who doesn't live and die for the confusing DC Beltway details (i.e., "normal" people), this book is for you. In particular, if you're a red-state Republican who still thinks that the Grand Old Party is the "party of limited government" then you DEFINITELY need to read this book. Then again, if you're a proud big government Democrat who cringes at the thought of Tom DeLay and George Bush running the nation's finances, this book will help you sleep better at night knowing that your favorite government program is probably still flush with taxpayer dollars.

The author details in clear language that the GOP is officially the "other" party of big government. And when card-carrying members of the Republican establishment argue that "the Democrats would be worse," you'll be able to explain to them that getting eaten by sharks or going quickly in your sleep still delivers the same result: death.

Affirming or negating the simple proposition, "there's little conservative about George W. Bush," is an excellent indicator of political preference in America. The left, as so many of their positions are rooted in emotion as opposed to reason, would vehemently dispute the validity of that statement. Those on the right know better of course. With less than a year left in his presidency, at least a sizable plurality of conservatives would agree that "compassionate conservatism" was nothing more than a Carteresque government spending spree. It was a Grand Old Spending Party that Mr. Bush emceed. Republicans managed to place a man in the White House with no more respect for fiscal responsibility and economic liberty than Lyndon Baines Johnson. The era might one day be known as Nixon 2: Bankruptcy Boogaloo.

Well, humor aside, such a view of the era is something we already have as Moody's is talking about lowering the rating of our national bonds at this very moment. Buck Wild: How Republicans Broke the Bank and Became the Party of Big Government tells the whole story of Mr. Bush's war on fiscal responsibility and also informs us as to how much the Republican Party has become the Party of Washington, D.C.. Slivinski shares some excellent material with his readers here. In fact, I've already referenced some of the text's charts and figures in my own writing. I guess this is to be expected though in relation to someone who works at the impeccable Cato Institute which does more to advance individual liberty then the majority of our Congressmen.

The vignette I liked best was the one concerning an old school senator from Maine who asked Howard Baker, upon the young man's arrival to the senate, if he liked "the smell of the marble." Meaning that once you smell the infrastructure and take in the perks of Washington you'll be "ruined for life." This is something that has happened to a plethora of our Representatives over time unfortunately. They get to know people, form relationships, and then suddenly forget the reasons why we sent them there in the first place. Yes, it's rather obscene but it's an all-too human outcome. The description of earmarks and the way in which pork barrel projects are rammed through sessions will definitely horrify you. Actually, most of this will horrify you if you happen to be a conservative like me. It's a necessary but deflating account of the defilement of the GOP.

For proponets of limited government this is a must read. I've often thought that if I really knew how to follow the money, I'd get closer to the truth of our government. This book is basically a historical map on federal spending, and should come with a warning: it'll make you mad as hell. Its worse than you even suspected.

Stephen Slivinski for president I say. We'll just work on the last name, call him "Ski" or something. I hope he reads this, I'd like to thank him for his work, and my awareness.

Andy Johnson, Salem VA.

This book provides a good insight into how the GOP went from small-government and minimized spending to big spenders as to maintain their power in DC. Essentially, the GOP gave up their principles for political gain. As such, the GOP mirrors the Democratic Party in enlarging government, but to their own contituents (Theocon and Neocon). While Bush did not start this trend, he embraced it through "compassionate conservativeness" very quickly and ensured the GOP stayed in power by spending money like there was no tomorrow. While the GOP were in power, Bush never vetoed one spending bill. Amazingly, after the Democrats took over the House and Senate, he got religion (so to speak) and transformed into a fiscal conservate who promised to veto every spending bill that went above his requested amount. Wow, I guess pigs do fly after all.

After all is said and done, the GOP is now the party of Big Government Theocracy as it caters to the "faith-based" with major spending and tilting the goverment to more "conservative" (if you can call it) direction. On that note, I do congratulate Bush and the GOP for delivering the big government that Pres. Clinton tried, but failed to achieved.

Don'e blame me, I voted *** Libertarian ***. This book does a fine job of showing how the "two party" system has become one big party at your expense! Only the Libertarian party offers a real alternative to the tax and spend Democrats, and the borrow and spend Republicans!

I got ahold of a copy prior to the official release. While one could certainly make the argument that the recent Republican government could have been more fiscally responsible, this book (apparently intentionally) avoids putting the associated Democrat behavior up for examination- in most of the cases cited, the Democrats were actually pushing for more irresponsible spending, and the Republicans were either not reeling them in quite enough or were forced to pass bills that included wasteful spending in order to provide funding to troops without delay. It took all of 10 minutes research to refute most of what I read in the book as I was reading it. Go ahead and spend money on this book if you want, but do a little investigation as you read it and you'll see what I mean- if you do, this book will actually achieve the opposite of what the author was hoping for.